The Complexity of Repairing, Adjusting, and Aggregating of Extensions in Abstract Argumentation

نویسندگان

  • Eun Jung Kim
  • Sebastian Ordyniak
  • Stefan Szeider
چکیده

We study the computational complexity of problems that arise in abstract argumentation in the context of dynamic argumentation, minimal change, and aggregation. In particular, we consider the following problems where always an argumentation framework F and a small positive integer k are given. • The Repair problem asks whether a given set of arguments can be modified into an extension by at most k elementary changes (i.e., the extension is of distance k from the given set). • The Adjust problem asks whether a given extension can be modified by at most k elementary changes into an extension that contains a specified argument. • The Center problem asks whether, given two extensions of distance k, whether there is a “center” extension that is a distance at most k − 1 from both given extensions. We study these problems in the framework of parameterized complexity, and take the distance k as the parameter. Our results covers several different semantics, including admissible, complete, preferred, semi-stable and stable semantics.

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

The Relationship between Syntactic and Lexical Complexity in Speech Monologues of EFL Learners

: This study aims to explore the relationship between syntactic and lexical complexity and also the relationship between different aspects of lexical complexity. To this end, speech monologs of 35 Iranian high-intermediate learners of English on three different tasks (i.e. argumentation, description, and narration) were analyzed for correlations between one measure of sy...

متن کامل

Repairing Preference-Based Argumentation Frameworks

Argumentation is a reasoning model based on the construction and evaluation of arguments. Dung has proposed an abstract argumentation framework in which arguments are assumed to have the same strength. This assumption is unfortunately not realistic. Consequently, three main extensions of the framework have been proposed in the literature. The basic idea is that if an argument is stronger than i...

متن کامل

On the Complexity of Enumerating the Extensions of Abstract Argumentation Frameworks

Several computational problems of abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) such as skeptical and credulous reasoning, existence of a non-empty extension, verification, etc. have been thoroughly analyzed for various semantics. In contrast, the enumeration problem of AFs (i.e., the problem of computing all extensions according to some semantics) has been left unexplored so far. The goal of this pa...

متن کامل

Characteristics of Multiple Viewpoints in Abstract Argumentation

The study of extension-based semantics within the seminal abstract argumentation model of Dung has largely focused on definitional, algorithmic and complexity issues. In contrast, matters relating to comparisons of representational limits, in particular, the extent to which given collections of extensions are expressible within the formalism, have been under-developed. As such, little is known ...

متن کامل

On the Complexity of Computing the Justification Status of an Argument

Motivation We adress the problem of: Determining the acceptance status of an argument in abstract argumentation (Given a semantics for computing the extensions). Motivation We adress the problem of: Determining the acceptance status of an argument in abstract argumentation (Given a semantics for computing the extensions). Traditional: Skeptical and/or Credulous Acceptance. Wu and Caminada recen...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره   شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2013